There’s today’s Charlottesville protests.
Then there’s #Charlottesville.
I fully condemn the ideology behind the neo-Nazi and “white supremacist” movements.
However, they have zero political power in the United States. If you mention Trump, then please explain Bill Clinton’s love of golf.
Structural racism is infinitely more of a threat to the lives of millions of African-Americans and other citizens than racist groups that always vote Republican. Euphemisms like “white nationalists” and “white supremacists” don’t take prison lobbyist money; Democrats and Republicans do. In reality, it’s the Democratic National Committee, the political entity deemed with defending the lives of African-Americans, Latinos, and other voters, that has done more to hurt their constituents than any right-wing ideology at Charlottesville.
For example, the DNC specifically told lawmakers not to offer “policy solutions” to Black Lives Matter, as illustrated in a Huffington Post piece titled Leaked 2015 Memo Told Dems: ‘Don’t Offer Support’ For Black Lives Matter Policy Positions:
WASHINGTON ― “Don’t offer support” for the “concrete policy positions” of Black Lives Matter protesters, the chief organization charged with electing Democrats to the House of Representatives warned its candidates in an internal memo leaked online on Wednesday...
“Presidential candidates have struggled to respond to tactics of the Black Lives Matter movement,” reads the memo, sent by a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee staffer in November. “While there has been little engagement with House candidates, candidates and campaign staff should be prepared. This document should not be emailed or handed to anyone outside of the building. Please only give campaign staff these best practices in meetings or over the phone.”
Black Lives Matter has become a force during the 2016 election by repeatedly calling on presidential candidates to address the systemic inequalities faced by black Americans. The movement has offered policy suggestions, held demonstrations and interrupted presidential campaign speeches in order to call attention to anti-black racism.
The memo, which describes BLM as a “radical movement” that aims to “end ‘anti-black racism,’” lists several suggestions for how Democratic congressional candidates should handle an encounter with a Black Lives Matter activist.
“If approached by BLM activists, campaign staff should offer to meet with local activists,” the memo reads. “Invited BLM attendees should be limited. Please aim for personal or small group meetings.”
“Listen to their concerns,” it continues. “Don’t offer support for concrete policy positions.”
The memo includes advice on what, exactly, to say to Black Lives Matter activists. It recommends avoiding phrases like “all lives matter” and warns not to bring up “black on black crime,” since the “response will garner additional media scrutiny and only anger BLM activists.”
House Democrats were also advised to say that police violence requires a national conversation, and to acknowledge that “a history of systemic racism continues to confront the daily lives of African Americans.”
Thus, Twitter warriors, eagerly calling others “racist” for even the slightest disagreement about today’s protests, almost always ignore the structural side of racism. They long to shame people online, while pretending to “be against” the Democratic Party; conveniently never trolling Democratic writers or pundits who’ve ignored the DNC’s white supremacy. Sadly, all they’re doing (when posting news of violence at Charlottesville) is shielding the Democratic Party from it’s failure not only to prevent a Trump presidency, but also the incarceration of hundreds of thousands of African-American citizens.
Now the new front-runner for Democratic nominee in 2020 is a former prosecutor, but let’s not get into the irony of Democratic politics.
News about today’s Charlottesville protests exists in two realities.
The horrific injuries and death associated with a clash of two opposing ideologies.
And then, there’s the convenient hashtag used to form the new Correct the Record of a failed identity politics paradigm that never shows outrage over Clinton taking money from prison lobbyists. This Intercept piece explains everything you need to know about Charlottesville, “white nationalists” and the Democratic Party:
Last week, Clinton and other candidates revealed a number of lobbyists who are serving as “bundlers” for their campaigns. Bundlers collect contributions on behalf of a campaign, and are often rewarded with special favors, such as access to the candidate.
Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit.
As we reported yesterday, fully five Clinton bundlers work for the lobbying and law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. Corrections Corporation of America, the largest private prison company in America, paid Akin Gump $240,000 in lobbying fees last year. The firm also serves as a law firm for the prison giant, representing the company in court.
Akin Gump lobbyist and Clinton bundler Brian Popper disclosed that he previously helped CCA defeat efforts to compel private prisons to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Hillary Clinton has a complicated history with incarceration. As first lady, she championed efforts to get tough on crime. “We need more police, we need more and tougher prison sentences for repeat offenders,” Clinton said in 1994. “The ‘three strikes and you’re out’ for violent offenders has to be part of the plan. We need more prisons to keep violent offenders for as long as it takes to keep them off the streets,” she added.
In recent months, Clinton has tacked left in some ways, and now calls for alternatives to incarceration and for greater police accountability. And while Clinton has backed a path to citizenship for undocumented people in America, she recently signaled a willingness to crack down on so-called “sanctuary cities,” a move that could lead to more immigrant detentions.
Yes, Clinton in 2015 took prison lobbyist money, the same lobbyists who benefit greatly from the white supremacy inherent in the U.S. criminal justice system, but you wouldn’t know that from today’s Twitter outrage.
Sorry Twitter, prison lobbyists don’t give money to “white nationalists” they gave money to the Democratic nominee. In fact, they gave almost as much money to the Democratic nominee as they did to Marco Rubio.
Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson received $5,000 from the group's PAC in 2010, ahead of his 2012 re-election run.
After the first presidential debate, when Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said she wanted to end the use of private prisons, Nelson was asked where he stood.
“I don’t know off the top of my head but I’ll check it out and give it a reasoned answer,” he said.
...Some Democrats who have previously received campaign donations from the private prison industry now express concerns.
“We have this whole industrial complex of harsh sentencing, too many nonviolent offenders in prison,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, home to two private detention facilities.
Brown received $1,000 in 2012 and $2,500 in the 2014 cycle from CCA’s PAC. His leadership PAC, America Works, got $5,000 in 2014 and $2,500 in the 2016 cycle.
Similarly, Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden received $1,000 in both the 2014 and 2016 cycles from CCA. But earlier this year, Wyden introduced legislation to prevent for-profit prisons from using certain tax incentives.
Who knew Sherrod Brown and Ron Wyden, including Clinton, accepted prison lobbyist money? Certainly not the Twitter warriors outraged over today’s protests.
I recently had a debate with Benjamin Dixon and Alex Rubinstiein over some heated issues pertaining to the right (not neo-Nazis, since not everyone on the right is a neo-Nazi) and left possibly meeting on major topics. Here are both debates, check them out. My overall argument is that structural racism is infinitely more dangerous than euphemisms like “alt-right.” Yet, there’s a convenient lack of outrage from the “left” pertaining to white supremacy within the Democratic Party.
Why the lack of outrage?
Whereas #Charlottesville will serve to bolster identity politics, and ironically the “white nationalists” allegedly opposed by various Twitter warriors, Democrats and Republicans will still take lots of money from prison lobbyists.
And Twitter warriors will continue to remain silent, focusing primarily on bullying others who dare to deviate even slightly from the accepted narrative of #Charlottesville.
And the DNC will demand you vote Democrat, or face the consequences online. Thus, #Charlottesville has served it’s purpose, in a post-Clinton presidential collapse world.